Inside Neverland--2003 Raid Photos

[YoungJRNY]

BTW: take a look around. Children aren't these sweet little innocent beings anymore. You should hear the language that comes out of 7-9 year olds' mouths. Pretty vulgar.. ones that shock me.

Yeah....they learn that from adults most the time.

It all comes back to bad parenting. You see less and less stay at home moms, and leaving their kids to be with either friends, or complete strangers.. leaving the kid to be exposed to things kids shouldn't be exposed to. Not the kids fault, but they can distinguish what's right and what's wrong most of the time.. at least I did when I was young.

[bluejeangirl76]

So he had a Hustler and Naughty Neighbors magazine in his home. So does a large part of America. That automatically proves his guilt as a pedophile for surez.

You're missing the point. People here and elsewhere are claiming as one of the reasons that he never did what he was accused of, despite the mountain of evidence to the contrary, is that he was "just a gentile little boy reliving a childhood he never had. He could never hurt a soul, because he was such a sweet dear person who was just trying to be a kid again"

That type of explanation goes out the window when you see the above pictures.


There are plenty of people out there that enjoy porn. I wouldn't say I'm one that purchases it or keeps it in my house....but if Tripple-J was truly this kid trapped in a tortured mans body, that everyone has been trying to say about him....

...this blows that right out of the water.

To be clear, I didn't claim he did or didn't do what he was accused of, because I don't know. I wasn't there. I only stated that I believe he never grew up in terms of social interaction with others, both adults and children. That doesn't mean he was a "child". Adults have porn... fact. And by the looks of those photos, he had porn featuring women. Not that this is indicitive of anything specific, but most things seem to indicate that he was heterosexual. yet no girls claimed to have been pee-pee touched by him.

But simply having porn magazines or movies is not something that can even be evidence. Having magazines in your posession means nothing more than you have magazines in your posession. Most if not all of the people who post on this board either have, or have had a porn magazine or video at one time or another.

I've owned magazines in the past, and I still might have a couple filthy dvds around somewhere - does that mean that I show them when children are in my home, or that I even know where the damn things are? (the videos, not the children... ) No it doesn't.

It's not evidence unless there is some kind of real proof that he used these magazines. How would the kids know there were there? Um, if you were a kid and you were in Michael Jackson's house, wouldn't you be curious enough to poke through drawers? I WOULD!!

I'm just saying... could have happened that way. Evidence, sure, but I say it's all circumstantial.

[YoungJRNY]

Well no shit. I got what you were saying. I don't care who the hell you are.. if you're a man, your PP will get hard. 100% proven fact. BTW: take a look around. Children aren't these sweet little innocent beings anymore. You should hear the language that comes out of 7-9 year olds' mouths. Pretty vulgar.. ones that shock me. I got your point. My point was that your right, and that even though MJ was genuine and labeled as a well nature and non-sexual guy.. he had a right to his privacy also. He wasn't fooling anybody, because when it comes down to it he's a man. Nothing wrong with that.

LOL Travis, always cracks me up when I hear a grown man call it his PP.

I had a couple chuckle sessions while writing that myself.

[Deb]

I've owned magazines in the past, and I still might have a couple filthy dvds around somewhere - does that mean that I show them when children are in my home, or that I even know where the damn things are? (the videos, not the children... ) No it doesn't.

It's not evidence unless there is some kind of real proof that he used these magazines. How would the kids know there were there? Um, if you were a kid and you were in Michael Jackson's house, wouldn't you be curious enough to poke through drawers? I WOULD!!

LOL Beej, you realize that is the only sentence Frank is going remember of your post don't ya?!

[bluejeangirl76]

I've owned magazines in the past, and I still might have a couple filthy dvds around somewhere - does that mean that I show them when children are in my home, or that I even know where the damn things are? (the videos, not the children... ) No it doesn't.

It's not evidence unless there is some kind of real proof that he used these magazines. How would the kids know there were there? Um, if you were a kid and you were in Michael Jackson's house, wouldn't you be curious enough to poke through drawers? I WOULD!!

LOL Beej, you realize that is the only sentence Frank is going remember of your post don't ya?!

That's his problem, not mine.

[The Sushi Hunter]

Forget everything that Michael was accused of for once second, and think of this horrific parenting going on here for a second.

Believe me, when I posted my response I was strictly basing my thoughts from my own situation and no one elses.

[JeremyP]

Well, Jeremy, I'm not looking to argue the issue on MJ any longer. The last thing I want to do is take it to the personal level either.

I do think that it's kinda hard to say that he was found not guilty by a jury of his peers. That's kinda odd to even contemplate, dont ya think? Those jurors that claimed after the fact that they felt he was guilty, clearly weren't peers of his. They weren't even born in the same side of a century with him....


Regardless, there's enough justification for folks to either stamp guilt on Jackson or absolve him of it. Obviously, it's clear where we all stand.

Personally, irrespective of the outcome of the case, there's enough information that unfolded during the case, for me to come to my own conclusion. I don't apply a great deal of confidence to the southern california court system. They failed to convict OJ, out of fear of racial unrest...and I firmly believe the same motivational factors come to play with Jackson. Maybe not racial (because he was no longer black and far more interested in being white)....but there were enough people that would have thrown a temper tantrum in socal, if he was thrown in jail, that the courts walked very carefully...


What I do find rather frustrating to see unfold, is all of the MJ love thrown in his direction, post-OD. I still maintain, if he were anyone else, his death (and all of the bullshit surrounding it) would carry a somber/subdued tone, because of the child molestation charges (whether or not he was found guilty). The mere fact that charges were brought against him, he paid his way out of another case and made the statements he did on tv, would be MORE than enough to make people rethink all of the tributes currently going on.

But the fact that they are simply being tossed to the side of the road (when before his death, people were MORE than happy and content with his living as a hermit out of the scrutiny of society) in favor of all this stupid tribute shit....is deplorable. It really is. This is child molestation. It wasn't like he got a few DWIs and all was well....

I'll leave it at that...

I understand what you're saying about coming to your own conclusion. That's your right and mine.

In regard to the "MJ love" you mentioned that you find frustrating, I have to say...Michael Jackson taught me how to love music at a very early age. He's a large part of the reason why I'm a musician today. I think probably a lot of people can say the same thing. When someone who had such a big role in making you who you are passes, it leaves a hole and there's a lot of hurt there. For me, the tributes are totally justified and quite honestly they couldn't go on long enough. I just wish the people who are praising him now would've been doing the same thing before he passed. We might have seen a different outcome.

I still think that "the mere fact that charges were brought against him" isn't enough to say he did it. (Not to mention the fact that he was found not guilty). I mean, there's a lady suing him now (or his estate) that claims she's the mother of all of his children, and that HER father is Lucifer, the devil. Think there's something to that as well?

Regarding him buying his way out of charges, celebs are sued for ridiculous crap all the time (see above) and they often pay whatever to not have to deal with it. Now, the comments he's made on tv about sharing a bed...I have to say, as others have, from everything I've seen, misguided though it may be, I truly believe that's how he saw the world.

As far as the porn they found goes, others have said it as well as I could.



Edit - I thought I heard on the news that the crazy lady was saying that she was the mother of one of his "twins" which, as far as I know, he doesn't have, but apparently she's saying she's the mother of all his kids. The devil being her father thing, she is claiming that.

[Behshad]

I thought I heard on the news that the crazy lady was saying that she was the mother of one of his "twins" which, as far as I know, he doesn't have, but apparently she's saying she's the mother of all his kids. The devil being her father thing, she is claiming that.

I think I know who that crazy lady is. I believe she is an active member here @ MR ...

[JasonD]

Well no shit. I got what you were saying. I don't care who the hell you are.. if you're a man, your PP will get hard. 100% proven fact. BTW: take a look around. Children aren't these sweet little innocent beings anymore. You should hear the language that comes out of 7-9 year olds' mouths. Pretty vulgar.. ones that shock me. I got your point. My point was that your right, and that even though MJ was genuine and labeled as a well nature and non-sexual guy.. he had a right to his privacy also. He wasn't fooling anybody, because when it comes down to it he's a man. Nothing wrong with that.

LOL Travis, always cracks me up when I hear a grown man call it his PP.

I was reading right along with such intensity & that, too, stopped me dead in my tracks & I thought to myself, "He did not just say PP!" but he did.

As for the porn magazines that doesn't mean anything unless it was kiddy porn, which it doesn't appear to be. The way I interpret the words "Barely Legal" means the people in the magazine are either 18 or 19 or somewhere along those lines. Legal, but barely.

[jrnyman28]

When I was 14 years old, I met this dude that was in his late 30's at the local bowling alley. He befriended me and then after some time he brought me to his car. He eventuallly showed me this type of materials and asked me if I knew what Jacking off was. I didn't so he explained it to me and then was asking me if I wanted to get some pussy cause he knew some chicks in the area who would do it with me. This dude was using straight pornography to try and get me interested in sexual behavior. Once he could establish that, he'd take it the next step in his direction. Thank God I was street smart and got the fuck away from that guy before he could do anything to me.

I am having a difficult time believing you had street smarts. Not to take away from the situation, but ultimately you were lucky.

[Rhiannon]

When someone who had such a big role in making you who you are passes, it leaves a hole and there's a lot of hurt there. For me, the tributes are totally justified and quite honestly they couldn't go on long enough. I just wish the people who are praising him now would've been doing the same thing before he passed. We might have seen a different outcome.

Exactly, exactly. Cliche' #1: You don't know what you got til it's gone.
Let anyone believe and feel however they want. It's pointless to argue as the truth in this case might not be ours to know. But there is something to be said about the difference between those who see the good in people and those who assume the worst.

Cliche' #2: Mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur.

[jrnyman28]

It all comes back to bad parenting. You see less and less stay at home moms,

First, I want to say that one does not mean the other.

Second, the one drawback to the equality-in-the-workplace movement is that once households earned double income everything cost twice as much. Now we cannot afford to have stay-at-home Mom's. That is a tragedy and I do agree that the affects on our youth are noticeable and sad.

[strangegrey]

Second, the one drawback to the equality-in-the-workplace movement is that once households earned double income everything cost twice as much. Now we cannot afford to have stay-at-home Mom's. That is a tragedy and I do agree that the affects on our youth are noticeable and sad.

The single biggest problem with our society right now....with an active, involved parent at home, drug problems, school problems, etc all go way down.

[jrnyman28]

I've owned magazines in the past, and I still might have a couple filthy dvds around somewhere - does that mean that I show them when children are in my home, or that I even know where the damn things are? (the videos, not the children... ) No it doesn't.

It's not evidence unless there is some kind of real proof that he used these magazines. How would the kids know there were there? Um, if you were a kid and you were in Michael Jackson's house, wouldn't you be curious enough to poke through drawers? I WOULD!!

LOL Beej, you realize that is the only sentence Frank is going remember of your post don't ya?!

Worked for me as well!

[strangegrey]

I've owned magazines in the past, and I still might have a couple filthy dvds around somewhere - does that mean that I show them when children are in my home, or that I even know where the damn things are? (the videos, not the children... ) No it doesn't.

It's not evidence unless there is some kind of real proof that he used these magazines. How would the kids know there were there? Um, if you were a kid and you were in Michael Jackson's house, wouldn't you be curious enough to poke through drawers? I WOULD!!

LOL Beej, you realize that is the only sentence Frank is going remember of your post don't ya?!

That's his problem, not mine.

Deb's right though. I didn't bother reading the rest of the post, even now. I just get lost on that first bold-faced sentence...


dayum girl!!!

[bluejeangirl76]

I've owned magazines in the past, and I still might have a couple filthy dvds around somewhere - does that mean that I show them when children are in my home, or that I even know where the damn things are? (the videos, not the children... ) No it doesn't.

It's not evidence unless there is some kind of real proof that he used these magazines. How would the kids know there were there? Um, if you were a kid and you were in Michael Jackson's house, wouldn't you be curious enough to poke through drawers? I WOULD!!

LOL Beej, you realize that is the only sentence Frank is going remember of your post don't ya?!

Worked for me as well!

Doesn't take much with you pervs, does it?

[stevew2]

Well no shit. I got what you were saying. I don't care who the hell you are.. if you're a man, your PP will get hard. 100% proven fact. BTW: take a look around. Children aren't these sweet little innocent beings anymore. You should hear the language that comes out of 7-9 year olds' mouths. Pretty vulgar.. ones that shock me. I got your point. My point was that your right, and that even though MJ was genuine and labeled as a well nature and non-sexual guy.. he had a right to his privacy also. He wasn't fooling anybody, because when it comes down to it he's a man. Nothing wrong with that.

LOL Travis, always cracks me up when I hear a grown man call it his PP.

I was reading right along with such intensity & that, too, stopped me dead in my tracks & I thought to myself, "He did not just say PP!" but he did.

As for the porn magazines that doesn't mean anything unless it was kiddy porn, which it doesn't appear to be. The way I interpret the words "Barely Legal" means the people in the magazine are either 18 or 19 or somewhere along those lines. Legal, but barely.

I bet you got a stack of "Barely Legal" gay porn in your gayrage

[jrnyman28]

I've owned magazines in the past, and I still might have a couple filthy dvds around somewhere - does that mean that I show them when children are in my home, or that I even know where the damn things are? (the videos, not the children... ) No it doesn't.

It's not evidence unless there is some kind of real proof that he used these magazines. How would the kids know there were there? Um, if you were a kid and you were in Michael Jackson's house, wouldn't you be curious enough to poke through drawers? I WOULD!!

LOL Beej, you realize that is the only sentence Frank is going remember of your post don't ya?!

Worked for me as well!

Doesn't take much with you pervs, does it?

For me it is all about ONE choice word: filthy. You didn't say "naughty" or "dirty" or even "porn". You said filthy!! I liiiike it!

[JeremyP]

Exactly, exactly. Cliche' #1: You don't know what you got til it's gone.
Let anyone believe and feel however they want. It's pointless to argue as the truth in this case might not be ours to know. But there is something to be said about the difference between those who see the good in people and those who assume the worst.

I agree.

Cliche' #2: Mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur.

I love that. It's so true.

[strangegrey]

But there is something to be said about the difference between those who see the good in people and those who assume the worst.

That in and of itself is one huge ass (high brow) assumption. One could just as easily say that something is to be said about the difference between people who see the injustice in something and those that are to afraid to speak up.